Petrus
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2025
- Messages
- 727
- Location
- Vva. del Rosario - Málaga - España
- Bike
- R18, Nimbus Type C sidecar, Vespas
Concerning the R18, when reading blogs, looking at youtubes, reading on fora, I ALWAYS end up wondering; just about all authors appear disconnected from the real world.
I mean the engine is an 1800 cc twin, meeting EURO5 emission/noise requirements. Yet it has 90 horses at what even half a century ago would have been seen as very low revs. In written words NÍNETY!! hp. In a motorbike, i.e. on one rear wheel and one meant for leisure riding.
Beejeezus, it needs an electronic limiter to not exceed 180 km/h. What do ´you´expect?!
Back to the topic title:
The BMW R69(U)S was a proper roadburner and had just over 40 hp pushing the normal sitting rider to 160 km/h.
Next look at the R90S which was dubbed a ´Superbike´. Its near 1000 cc engine produced 67 hp at 7k revs, and with the ridier crouched behind the fairing had a top speed of nearly 200 km/h. Less and more revvy horses and 5 gears to reach a higher top speed.
Mind, these two were in a world not much if at all bothered about emissions and the exhaust was ditto less constricted by social pressure.
Again; I wonder if the ´testers´ have much real world motorcycling perspective.
When I started riding motorbike, racing motorbikes in offical competion, we raced on ´circuits´ which were tempoarily closed off public roads. It was dangerous, riders got killed. Today, about half a century later, the roads are basically unchanged. Badly maintained tarmac is in no way better than well maintained bricks and the scarily increased amount of road ´furniture´ has added a sh@itload of unmovable objects a motorcyclist can be hurt by.
The real world is not just highways or interstates!
And that is not mentioning motorists in cars making them feel safe; trusting their driver´s aids and no way looking over their shoulder for any motorcyclist.
Right, so we have real world roads on the one hand and a cruiser with leisure superbike performance on the other. Oh my, the easily adjustable (did they??) rear hydraulic strut, compromised by the travel the hardtail look imposes dûh!, does not detach the rider´s bum from the bad tarmac.
No it does not allow the same angle of lean as a sports bike because.... it ÍS NOT!
Things like that.
Effing whatsits; seems like journalist and self acclaimed internet heroes nééd to be negative.
Wake up. There is a reason that Royal Enfields, even the humble 350, are selling so well. As much vfm those offer, imo the R18 offers a lót more in any ascpect.
Last perspective: The speed limits.
The network of wonderful twisties connecting the inland villages are 60-70 km/h and if with tarmac uprated ´camino rural´ only 30 km/h. 50 only by exception.
On highways 120 km/h if i am lucky and otherwise 100 or even 80.
It is 90 or 80 on the provincial roads (equivalent of interstate).
Hów many revs is that when rumbling about?
I say get real and start enjoying yourselves dudes.
I mean the engine is an 1800 cc twin, meeting EURO5 emission/noise requirements. Yet it has 90 horses at what even half a century ago would have been seen as very low revs. In written words NÍNETY!! hp. In a motorbike, i.e. on one rear wheel and one meant for leisure riding.
Beejeezus, it needs an electronic limiter to not exceed 180 km/h. What do ´you´expect?!
Back to the topic title:
The BMW R69(U)S was a proper roadburner and had just over 40 hp pushing the normal sitting rider to 160 km/h.
Next look at the R90S which was dubbed a ´Superbike´. Its near 1000 cc engine produced 67 hp at 7k revs, and with the ridier crouched behind the fairing had a top speed of nearly 200 km/h. Less and more revvy horses and 5 gears to reach a higher top speed.
Mind, these two were in a world not much if at all bothered about emissions and the exhaust was ditto less constricted by social pressure.
Again; I wonder if the ´testers´ have much real world motorcycling perspective.
When I started riding motorbike, racing motorbikes in offical competion, we raced on ´circuits´ which were tempoarily closed off public roads. It was dangerous, riders got killed. Today, about half a century later, the roads are basically unchanged. Badly maintained tarmac is in no way better than well maintained bricks and the scarily increased amount of road ´furniture´ has added a sh@itload of unmovable objects a motorcyclist can be hurt by.
The real world is not just highways or interstates!
And that is not mentioning motorists in cars making them feel safe; trusting their driver´s aids and no way looking over their shoulder for any motorcyclist.
Right, so we have real world roads on the one hand and a cruiser with leisure superbike performance on the other. Oh my, the easily adjustable (did they??) rear hydraulic strut, compromised by the travel the hardtail look imposes dûh!, does not detach the rider´s bum from the bad tarmac.
No it does not allow the same angle of lean as a sports bike because.... it ÍS NOT!
Things like that.
Effing whatsits; seems like journalist and self acclaimed internet heroes nééd to be negative.
Wake up. There is a reason that Royal Enfields, even the humble 350, are selling so well. As much vfm those offer, imo the R18 offers a lót more in any ascpect.
Last perspective: The speed limits.
The network of wonderful twisties connecting the inland villages are 60-70 km/h and if with tarmac uprated ´camino rural´ only 30 km/h. 50 only by exception.
On highways 120 km/h if i am lucky and otherwise 100 or even 80.
It is 90 or 80 on the provincial roads (equivalent of interstate).
Hów many revs is that when rumbling about?
I say get real and start enjoying yourselves dudes.
Last edited:
